MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259944796

Virtual Playgrounds and BuddyBots: A Data-minefield for Tweens

2005· article· en· W2259944796 on OpenAlexaffabout
Valerie Steeves, Ian R. Kerr

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningAdvertisingProduct (mathematics)Order (exchange)Internet privacyPsychologyIdentity (music)SociologyBusinessArtComputer scienceCommunicationAesthetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the online places where tweens play, chat, and hang out. We argue that the vision behind these places is defined by commercial imperatives that seek to embed surveillance deeper and deeper into children’s playgrounds and social interactions. Online marketers do more than implant branded products into a child’s play; they collect the minute details of a child’s life so they can build a ‘‘relationship’’ of ‘‘trust’’ between the child and brand. Although marketing to children is not new, a networked environment magnifies the effect on a child’s identity because it opens up a child’s private online spaces to the eye of the marketer in unprecedented ways. Online marketers accordingly invade the child’s privacy in a profound sense, by artificially manipulating the child’s social environment and communications in order to facilitate a business agenda.\nWe start by examining five of the Web sites that have been identified by tweens as ‘‘favorites’’. Each site contains examples of marketing practices that are typical of virtual playgrounds, and which turn kids’ online play into a continuous feedback loop for market research.\nAfter looking at the places where tweens play, we turn to one of the places where tweens talk. We examine how the principles of human-computer interaction have been used in an instant messaging environment to create virtual ‘‘people’’ that interact with kids, for all intents and purposes, like a real person. By logging the interactions, these BuddyBot programs are able to ‘‘learn’’ about the child and create the illusion of friendship between it and the child. This perfects the relationship between the child and the brand by introducing a virtual person into the equation, a person who is able to give the child ideas about what clothes to wear, what movies to see, what products to buy.\nFinally, we provide a brief overview of American and Canadian legislation dealing with children’s online privacy, and assess whether or not current laws have been able to protect children’s privacy in the online environment. We also examine the ways in which electronic commerce legislation has addressed the role of virtual agents, and assess how well fair information practices can protect kids from the invasive nature of child-bot relationships.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207